Skip to main content
Log in

Why Criminal Law? The Role of Utilitarianism: A Response to Husak

Criminal Law and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. The Independent, August 16, 2006.

  2. See Bentham (1789).

  3. See Hart (1968).

  4. See Ashworth (2006).

  5. See Amirthalingam (2006).

  6. See Minkkinen (2006).

  7. See Finnis (1971).

  8. S.142(1).

  9. See Husak (2004).

  10. See Morgan and Clarkson (1995), Tonry (1987).

References

  • Amirthalingam, K. (2006). Culture, crime and culpability in perspectives on the defence of provocation. In A. Renteln & M. Foblets (Eds.), Multicultural jurisprudence: Comparative perspectives on the cultural defence. Hart Publications.

  • Ashworth, A. (2006). Principles of criminal law (5th ed., pp. 30–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. London: T. Payne and Son.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnis, J. (1971). The restoration of retribution. Analysis, 32, 131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H. L. A. (1968). Prolegomenon to the principles of punishment. In Punishment and responsibility: Essays in the philosophy of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Husak, D. (2004). The criminal law as last resort. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 24, 207, 223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkkinen, P. (2006). ‘If Taken in Earnest’: Criminal law doctrine and the last resort. Howard Journal, 45, 521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R., & Clarkson, C. (1995). The politics of sentencing reform: introduction. In C. Clarkson & R. Morgan (Eds.), The politics of sentencing reform. Oxford: Clarendon University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonry, M. (1987). Sentencing guidelines and sentencing commissions—The second generation. In K. Pease & M. Wasik (Eds.), Sentencing reform: Guidance or guidelines. Manchester University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. M. V. Clarkson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clarkson, C.M.V. Why Criminal Law? The Role of Utilitarianism: A Response to Husak. Criminal Law, Philosophy 2, 131–135 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-008-9049-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-008-9049-2

Keywords

Navigation